Post Iowa Results: Perry takes the lead
By Michael Fletcher | Tuesday, August 16th, 2011 | PoliticsIn spite of Mr. Kirwin’s brilliant analysis the other day, Rasmussen tells us that Rick Perry has surged into the lead among GOP primary voters.
GOP Primary: Perry 29%, Romney 18%, Bachmann 13%
Rasmussen Reports
Texas Governor Rick Perry, the new face in the race for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, has jumped to a double-digit lead over Mitt Romney and Michele Bachmann with the other announced candidates trailing even further behind. Read more.
Kirwin might still be right that the nominee won’t be any of the “top” three.
But for now, Perry is shaking things up.
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Michael Fletcher works as a freelance writer and consultant in Richmond, Virginia. He blogs regularly at http://www.thewritesideofmybrain.com, http://www.richmondvabusiness.com and http://365thingsibelieve.wordpress.com
We're 75% there! Thank you to everyone who has so far contributed! Just $2000 to go!
Comments
10 Responses to "Post Iowa Results: Perry takes the lead"
I’d think that’s the effect of being “the new kid in town” that the GOP had been hoping for. Was the poll in the field before Gov. Perry spent a couple of days taking target practice at his own foot?
I agree with Steve V. Perry’s teleprompter may need to be taken out of mothballs. He may have the same kind of problem as Obama, although the text he blurts out comes from the Alamo rather than Alinsky. Channeling some Alamo talk, I’ll tell Michael to keep his powder dry and don’t be talking down the Kirwin without goldplated proof.
In the summer of 2008, this was the hot story:
“Fred Thompson has moved to the front of the GOP field, according to the latest Rasmussen poll. Thompson, preparing to formally announce his candidacy, leads the pack in the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey with 27% support. That gives him a four-point advantage over former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani who is currently preferred by 23% of Likely Primary Voters.”
Yes, and now he is hawking reverse mortgages. I don’t see one viable candidate for President in this bunch of poll watchers, and suspect that Brian is right; someone else will emerge to save the party. And one must admit the ground is shifting under their feet. Most Americans approve of the balanced approach, and if the republicans once again obstruct a real deal in the super committee, the blame will fall again on them, and suddenly the air in the tea party/republican study committee balloon starts to go flat in a hurry. Voters are starting to pay attention, and republican intrasigence is getting tiring, even as they double down on that tactic. At this point in time, it is a high risk strategy.
The difference between FT and Perry is that Fred wasn’t even trying to put together a campaign team while he was taking months to decide if he would run or not. As soon as Perry started thinking about a run, he did his homework, and began putting a team together. The other fact is that Perry’s 2010 team never left him, and were just waiting in the wings in case he decided to get in. Gingrich’s Iowa team went right over to Perry. How do you think he did as well as he did in the Iowa straw poll, despite being a write-in, and never having visited the state as a potential or declared candidate until the day after the event? There is a long time until the nomination, and anything can happen to any of the candidates until then, and, it is a long time to hold onto the lead. If he manages to stay high in the polling for at least a few months, he can win. It’s unfortunate but, many decide based on who is leading in the polls, as some want to back a winner no matter who they are. It’s almost like a self fullfilling prophesy.
I find it amusing that so many Republicans are having a problem with his statement against Bernake when Christie, Palin and Bachmann are loved for their bold and gutsy statements. Karl Rove will just have to get used to the fact that he is no longer a kingmaker.
Well, if Perry did indeed do all that background and foundation work, it just shows how ill equipped he himself is as a candidate. Afterall, Pawlenty had an extremely effective campaign organization, and probably would have done well in the general election, but when we ascribe all this power to a few people in Iowa to shape the future leadership of the nation, nothing good can from it. Perry will of course tout his job creating record, but of course, he had little to do with it, and anyone who looks at the jobs will see that they were mostly landscape workers or energy workers. Only 25% of workers have health insurance in Texas, and their unemployment rate is higher than in Mass. which has universal health insurance. Let’s hear him explain that away.
I can’t believe the kinds of things they are saying about Perry, just moments ago in reference to Perry’s recent comments Chris Wallace asked Perry during an interview “Are you a flake ?”
Oh, wait, no, he didn’t. Because the Republican Party establishment now has their man. No, they aren’t asking if Perry’s comments about Texas succeeding from the union makes him a flake, they’re all over the news today calming fears. No, Perry isn’t a flake, he’s just passionate, and we want someone who is passionate. He didn’t really mean treason, Rove said he just got a little over excited, he’s learned his lesson already.
What were they asking Bachmann if she was a flake for, because she didn’t want to increase the debt ceiling and tried to get other people to go along with her ? What, because she has a lot of foster kids ??? I didn’t hear Rove out there defending Bachmann, that’s for sure, he did everything short of kicking dirt in her eyes whenever he had the chance.
They’re weaving the narrative together now, dismissing Bachmann, not even mentioning Paul, everything is about what Perry’s strategy is going to be, what he needs to do to win, how he moves forward to his inevitable primary win.
Well Temporary, welcome to Politics. They are all flakes, everyone of the so called republican candidates, because they simply ignore the elephant in the room; it was the Bush tax cuts and the fighting of two wars and increases in Medicare spending that almost caused fiscal armageddon, yet they all ignore that real world result which has had such a profound effect on the net worth of each one of us. Frankly, there is not one of them worth two bits, especially Romney, who knows better but can’t get the nomination unless he lies. Eight candidates spouting nonsense may work for the right wing, but it certainly will not work for America.
Mike says, “when we ascribe all this power to a few people in Iowa to shape the future leadership of the nation, nothing good can from it.”
Obama won the Iowa caucuses. Wow, I agree with Mike!
BK- I agree with both of you (which is usually pretty difficult). Letting the people of two small, unrepresentative states have as much power in the presidential selection process as they do makes absolutely no sense.
Leave your response